Posted on 04/08/2010 6:19:48 AM PDT by fight_truth_decay
Researchers investigating the use of phenols, phthalates and phytoestrogens, used in packaging as well as perfumes, lotions and shampoos, has found evidence they can cause harm by interfering with the body's hormones.
A study of the effects of the three compounds on 1,151 pre-pubescent girls in the US found they caused a variety of problems in puberty.
Dr Mary Wolff, an oncologist at the Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, said: "Research has shown that early pubertal development in girls can have adverse social and medical effects, including cancer and diabetes later in life.
"Our research shows a connection between chemicals that girls are exposed to on a daily basis and either delayed or early development. While more research is needed, these data are an important first step in continuing to evaluate the impact of these common environmental agents in putting girls at risk."
The chemicals increase durability in nail polishes and add fragrance to perfumes, lotions, and shampoos. Some are also used to increase the flexibility of plastics such as PVC, and as coatings on medications and nutritional supplements.
Phthalates are banned in cosmetics in Europe but are allowed in the United States.
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
Or real science, but enough about you.
Just as I suspected. You got nuthin'. However, you have provided one small contribution.... another lesson for everyone on why arguing with an idiot is a waste of time.
Nope.
IIRC it is Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease, a transmissible spongiform encephalopathy, caused by a prion and believed passed on to a few humans via beef from infected cattle (among other causes including (and not limited to) usage of HGH drawn from the pituitary glands of cadavers who died from Creutzfeldt–Jakob Disease, and infected surgical instruments). Very nasty - I’ve seen it.
‘In theory’, in the US, downer cattle (believed possibly) are no longer fed to cattle in the US., HGH from cadavers is no longer used, and blood donor restrictions have been instituted to prevent transmission to humans.
Believing that adding imitation fruit flavor to your gummy bears makes them nutritious food doesn’t make you a scientist.
Finally! Somebody who understands that cows are not meant to be fed to each other. I was getting lonely.
Please ping me when you find someone who claimed that.
Is that crackpot idea somehow different from the belief that cows should eat each other’s carcasses and be injected with harmful synthetic hormones?
Is that your admission you were making stuff up again? LOL!
I’m just trying to find out where you pseudoscientists draw the line.
As opposed to real scientists, like you? LOL!
Cypher for us. Do yer kin proud.
I was wrong about the fifty lbs. per day. 9-15 lbs of supplement is more like it.
Thank you. I was feeling real bad for any cattle you might have. That’s much better. ; )
The American Farmer has provided our country more food at lower prices than has ever been available in the entire thousands of years history of the world.
No one has even come close. By a factor of 10.
We have so many food riches that consumers can even chose the high priced, low yield, low quality ‘natural foods’. No other country has ever been able to offer such a wide variety for such low prices.
There is also no question that our biologically generated estrone, estrial, estradial, and it metabolites have varying degrees of “strength”, if I may use that term. The same is true of phthalates and phytoestrogens such as soy. Neither of the latter substances come close to having the same kind of kind of effects on the human body as the former. It is more likely that the effects that are cited in the article you posted are from an endogenous imbalance of the many different estrogens and their metabolites (ie the 2-, 4-, and 16-alpha-hydroxderivatives of estrone).
When someone attempts to use such words as “estrogen-like compounds”, “estrogen disruptors” and the phrase “There is no question that hormonal compounds can have effects at extremely low concentrations” alarm bells go off in my head. It tells me that they have no clue as to what they are talking about. It also tells me that they have an agenda which has no basis in scientific fact but are working to reach only a consensus. Consensus, as we have seen in the concept of man-made global warming, is not science at all but politics masquerading as science.
I just read the rest of the posts. Every one posting on this article who works for the EPA or receives grant money from a government, either foreign or domestic, to study the environment please raise your hand.....I thought so.
Besides talking to yourself, were you the only one raising your hand?
My hand was decidedly down. Lots of scare-info being posted here. SOP for the EPA and its minions. And yes I was talking to myself...it’s past my bedtime.
We raise cattle..don’t use any suppliments..just grass fed beef. We raise our cattle this way because its cheaper for us. We don’t spend any $$$ on suppliments.
Here is an interesting article written about early puberty. I believe the early scare puberty thing is kinda like the glo-bull warming scam.
http://www.marnijameson.com/archives/la_times/health/Little_Women.pdf
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.